From mboxrd@z Thu Jan 1 00:00:00 1970 From: =?ISO-8859-1?Q?Nicolas_de_Peslo=FCan?= Subject: Re: [patch net-next-2.6] net: reinject arps into bonding slave instead of master Date: Mon, 07 Mar 2011 22:30:57 +0100 Message-ID: <4D754E91.1040208@gmail.com> References: <1299320969-7951-1-git-send-email-jpirko@redhat.com> <1299320969-7951-7-git-send-email-jpirko@redhat.com> <4D7249BA.8030401@gmail.com> <20110305144314.GC8573@psychotron.redhat.com> <4D724DB4.9020207@gmail.com> <4D737D00.20406@gmail.com> <20110306133413.GB2795@psychotron.redhat.com> <20110307125059.GA6053@psychotron.brq.redhat.com> <20110307143202.GS11864@gospo.rdu.redhat.com> <4D753C40.2030502@gmail.com> <20110307211957.GB3266@psychotron.redhat.com> Mime-Version: 1.0 Content-Type: text/plain; charset=ISO-8859-1; format=flowed Content-Transfer-Encoding: QUOTED-PRINTABLE Cc: Andy Gospodarek , netdev@vger.kernel.org, davem@davemloft.net, shemminger@linux-foundation.org, kaber@trash.net, fubar@us.ibm.com, eric.dumazet@gmail.com To: Jiri Pirko Return-path: Received: from mail-wy0-f174.google.com ([74.125.82.174]:61775 "EHLO mail-wy0-f174.google.com" rhost-flags-OK-OK-OK-OK) by vger.kernel.org with ESMTP id S1751853Ab1CGVa7 (ORCPT ); Mon, 7 Mar 2011 16:30:59 -0500 Received: by wyg36 with SMTP id 36so4610398wyg.19 for ; Mon, 07 Mar 2011 13:30:58 -0800 (PST) In-Reply-To: <20110307211957.GB3266@psychotron.redhat.com> Sender: netdev-owner@vger.kernel.org List-ID: Le 07/03/2011 22:19, Jiri Pirko a =E9crit : >> >> Andy, while you are testing it, can you ensure it also works for the= following setup? >> >> eth0 -> bond0 -> br0 -> br0.100 >> > > I do not think this will work (it never did). Yes, but it should... > Bridge reinjects skb, does not do another loop. Yes, but it should... > Therefore when skb->dev =3D=3D br0 and vlan_on_bond hook is called, o= rig_dev =3D=3D br0 as well. + No > IFF_BONDING is set. If only bridge returned RX_HANDLER_ANOTHER with skb->dev changed to br0= =2E.. instead of re-injecting=20 the skb... One more reason to avoid re-injecting. > I have some kind nice solution in mind and I'm going to submit that a= s a patch later (too many > patches are in the wind atm). Agreed. It's time for others to review, test and ack :-D Nicolas.